Palace calls for responsible discourse on cyber law

MANILA, Philippines - Amending the Cybercrime Law is always possible, Malacañang said yesterday, as it called for “responsible discourse” on the issue.

In a press briefing, presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda said the law was enacted to address legitimate concerns about criminal behavior and its effects on society.

“Questions have been raised about the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Act. We recognize and respect efforts not only to raise these issues in court, but to propose amendments to the law in accordance with constitutional processes,” Lacierda said.

“We have not stopped anyone from expressing their concerns. And we have also stated for the record and in my statement that we respect efforts (to challenge the law),” Lacierda said.

He cited petitions against the law filed with the Supreme Court as well as plans of some senators to introduce amendments to the law.

“We welcome it. That’s part of the legal and constitutional processes that continue,” he said.

“We believe there is an opportunity for reasonable discourse between concerned stakeholders and the Department of Justice,” he added.

“This dialogue can address stakeholder concerns as the implementing rules and regulations are drafted. We urge the fullest and widest participation of stakeholders in this process,” he said.

“Our Constitution is clear and uncompromising in the civil liberties it guarantees all our people. As the basic law, its guarantees cannot, and will not, be diminished or reduced by any law passed by Congress,” he said. “The administration is equally adamant in upholding these liberties, which were regained at such high cost by our people.”

Lacierda said President Aquino himself said on Sept. 27 during the launching of the memoirs of Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile that vigorous exchange of ideas “is the hallmark of a vibrant democracy” and that it “requires those who disagree not to oppress others.”

“We would therefore like to point out that no government entity has moved to deprive anyone of access to the Internet or to suppress civil liberties as exercised online. In fact, what has taken place is that hackers who claim to be aligned with critics of the Cybercrime Act are the ones who have engaged in online vandalism, depriving the broader public of access to much needed government information and services online,” Lacierda said.

Lacierda dared critics of the Cybercrime Act to speak out against online vandalism and bullying with as much vigor and passion as they did in opposing certain provisions of the law.

“If our freedoms have been hard won, it would do us all well to remember that in the end, vigilantism harms the cause of freedom of expression and civil liberties for all netizens,” Lacierda said.

Lacierda said the online libel provision was inserted by Sen. Vicente Sotto III during a deliberation on the bill. The online libel and the takedown clause were some of the most contentious provisions of the new law.

“The takedown clause was also inserted during the Senate deliberation, for the record. However, the penalty on the libel provision was inserted in (bicameral conference committee)… There has been misinformation on that point, that’s why we are clearing it up,” Lacierda said.

“The irony of it all is that today (Wednesday)… is the first day of the implementation of the law, we have all the papers saying stop e-martial law. There is freedom of expression,” Lacierda said.

Lacierda said the President cannot really veto some lines “unless it is an appropriations bill such as budget.”

“So if it’s an appropriations bill you can veto a line-item. You cannot do that in a non-appropriations bill. You either sign the entire law or you veto the entire law,” Lacierda said. “We will work within the tenets of the ambit of the Constitution. That is our guarantee to all the people.”